Ivo
Established Member
If what you say is correct (I dont know) then yes it is deserving.I never said Leicester wasnt deserving though.
As for more deserving? Well they are both historically cities. Just one is older than the other. So wouldnt say more deserving no.
bb21 is correct. Further to this point, Lancaster has only been a city for 75 years.
I have to admit, I never knew Leicester was even a city until you mentioned it! Ive always gone round calling it a town![]()
Considering its substantial size?
History as far as city status goes. St Asaph is historically a city. Is Chelmsford? I may be wrong, but i never thought it had been a city.
Prior to the Diamond Jubilee award, Chelmsford had never been a city.